Ask HN: Why aren't there many credible online bachelors programs?

[non-entity]

There are swaths of masters programs out there that can be completed online, and are backed by legitimate, well respected institutions.

bachelor degrees, on the other hand, seem to be pretty desolate. There are a handful of well known, decent schools that offer online bachelor degrees, but majority seem to require existing credit or offer non-sense sounding degrees in favor of normal ones (i.e. I've seen schools offer degrees in Professional Studies, Organization studies or Interdisciplinary Studies vs. Computer Science or Physics). Occasionally, you can find a legitimate looking CS degree from a legitimate school, but the programs still seem be below what you would get in-person.

I imagine there has to be a number of uneducated, working people who want to achieve more, or who's career progression many be held back because they don't have that credential, but the only schools advertising to them are the for profits, who charge exorbitant amounts for what seem like below average programs.

[JediTrilobite]

I used to work in the higher-education field for a respected private university, and I think I know part of the answer to this: institutional momentum.

This university launched an online MBA program early on, and built it out with a bunch of other offerings as well. We were genuinely ahead of the curve on a bunch of things, but we were also pretty separated from the rest of the university, physically and culturally. We had our own building removed from campus, and we did things a little differently. Not quite Silicon Valley agile, but comparatively. Meanwhile, the rest of the campus was adamantly against online learning, for years.

I think a big part of this is that we had an older faculty and institutional culture that was pretty set in its ways: they didn't see or recognize the value that the internet afforded their classrooms, and weren't set up to implement them. That's begun to change a bit as we got younger faculty, but there's still a tendency towards in-person learning, because of the tradition and training behind it.

I don't think this is necessarily malevolent on their part: they just haven't thought deeply about it. Plus, there's a lot of infrastructure that you'd have to build out to provide online learning: there are a lot of logistical obstacles in the way. You need to select a CMS, hire course developers, train reluctant faculty and staff, figure out how to make it accessible and ADA-compliant, design courses that make sense for online learning, then market to students who are willing to go up online to take their classes.

Those are a lot of hurtles to overcome for an institution, and it requires a lot of willpower and political wrangling within the institution in order to make sure it gets done. As a result... it just doesn't. I think it'll change with time, but it's like turning an aircraft carrier: you can't do it overnight.

[impendia]

I wrote a long-winded, somewhat ill-tempered response, and then quickly deleted it. But in brief --

I have thought semi-deeply about teaching online. I do believe it can be done well, but only with a lot of effort, and (at least in my department) I don't think it would save the university money, if done well.

Personally, I'm not terribly eager to invest this effort. I've had a poor experience with our university's training, and also I just like interacting with people in person better. Maybe I'm just being selfish, but there are a lot of other things I can do to benefit my university and my students, which I'd enjoy more, and I'd rather invest my efforts there.

That said, I do think that universities who are willing to hire faculty for remote work could develop fantastic online programs. There are tons of dual-career academic couples that don't get jobs in the same city, and try and make some crazy commuter marriage work. Hire them.

[pyuser583]

Part of the issue is that BA programs are supposed to transition students from high school to the “adult world.”

The is very, very hard to do.

Look at how many BA students wash out at respectable institutions. At least 50%.

It required more than classes. It requires mentoring, encouraging, and shaping students to a degree that’s hard to do online.

Graduate degrees are different. They take in people who have already graduated, and who are more adapted.

Not many Ph. D students throw keggers five times a week.

[ChuckMcM]

Of all the answers here, this is the one I resonate with the most. There is a tremendous diversity in skill levels of students entering a Bachelor's program, from borderline illiterate to exceptionally equipped.

And say what you will about whether or not a college degree is "important", everyone I've ever met[1] who has one has some key skills that not everyone has; the ability to work on a project over time, some ability to research a question, and the ability to work on "uninteresting" things to get to the "interesting" things.

Getting a masters degree is about processing information, organizing it into something you can use, and then demonstrating your skill at that by applying to to a problem of your choosing. These programs can "assume" you've got the basic skills already and work from there.

[1] And being a nerd is biased toward BS degrees rather than BA degrees but the trend seems consistent to me.

[mrosett]

How much mentoring do you think goes on at your average school? My assumption is the motivated students seek it out, but the 5x/week kegger types probably get very little.

[sirsuki]

What the an Associate’s Degree for then?

[dcminter]

The Open University is pretty well respected: http://www.open.ac.uk/

[mmmBacon]

Arizona State seems to have some good online bachelor degrees. They don't offer CS but they do have software engineering.

https://asuonline.asu.edu/online-degree-programs/undergradua...

[_eht]

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I finished my last year of AA (psych) with University of Phoenix after starting at my local community college. Side by side I wouldn’t hesitate to say that while the data transfer medium was different, the work and testing was on par with the community college curriculum. I would note that there was a lot more written work than lecture at UoP, but that could be a discrepancy between first and second year studies.

The stigma for attending one of these schools is terrible. Not undeserved, as they are predatory and for profit. But so are community colleges, in maybe different ways, but for the same reasons.

I keep it on my resume even though I work in IT. I’m personally proud of it as an accomplishment despite the crap I catch whenever it’s brought up.

[sloaken]

I think this is a good one: https://www.wgu.edu/online-it-degrees.html

[bluedays]

My wife went to this school. I was initially skeptical, but it is probably one of the best things she ever did. She got her degree in teaching, and got hired almost immediately. This is her first year, and she unfortunately had to start halfway through last semester and now has to distance teaching -- but the important thing is that she has a job in the field she wanted to work in. Without WGU and the flexibility it afforded her she would not be where she is right now.

Could not recommend this school enough.

Disclaimer: I do not work for WGU or any of these affiliates. This comes across as a bit like an advertisement. I really do think it's been amazing for her.

[50208]

Agree. I completed 2 years at 2 different "brick and mortar" Universities in the past, took a long hiatus to build a career in IT, then went back to school (WGU) to complete a BS in IT-Security last June and am now back again and enrolled in the Masters in Cybersecurity and Information Assurance program. I / we haven't missed a beat with the onset of this pandemic (unlike almost everything else in my life) and that's saying something.

Just like the "B&M" classes I took previously, some classes are great, some less so, some hard, some less so. Anyone who thinks a school like WGU is "less good" probably has not actually experienced it and / or has a reason to protect the status quo. A student does have to self direct more in online programs, for a fact. But with that comes much more flexibility and scheduling freedom. And the price, at least for WGU, can't be beat.

[PenguinCoder]

> wgu

I second and can vouch for this one. I completed my B.S in 3.5 yrs with WGU, and it was one of the best decisions I made. Competency based (don't need to waste 3 months doing a course I already know about), and flat-fee (2.8k a 6mo term). It is very affordable and if you're self-sufficient, WGU is a great option. Really flexible and good curriculum if you're self-motivated.

[madhadron]

As a former academic, I've been quite impressed with what I've seen of Western Governors University. I haven't enrolled there since I already have more degrees than I have any use for.

[cstejerean]

I can also recommend WGU. I only wish I’d found them sooner. I took a break from school 14 years ago because I ran out of money, and had no problems finding a job without finishing my degree. Then life got in the way and I never found a good reason to go back to school.

Then after a while I started contemplating going to grad school, more of a nice to have for personal development reasons.

But I couldn’t without a completed undergrad. So a little over 2 years ago I enrolled in WGU and now I have 3 classes to go.

[runawaybottle]

It might be as simple as there as tens of thousands of 18 year olds ready to fill existing Bachelor’s programs straight out of High School. The financing for that is low hanging fruit, they can use their federal aid or loans to pay for several semesters (whether they pass or fail). This stream of cash is easy money, new adults and their parents are expected to spend their time and money on this from a cultural standpoint. There’s nothing to switch up in this business model.

Now take a Master’s program. Most people are done with college and are working full time. If you seriously want their business, you better offer them every flexibility in the world. It’s a whole different game.

One group is literally groomed to hand you money, often not even their own. The latter is a group that is no longer part of that setup and will make an independent decision based on a variety of factors.

[verdverm]

Self study is never going to be as good as immersion in an academic environment. The impact that ad hoc conversations and events with peers and professors have is profound. You just don't get this with online or remote learning.

[andy9775]

My undergrad is very focused on self-study. Prof's have gone the the extent of saying, "I won't waste time showing you this, you could just go on youtube". Flipped classroom models are increasing and the focus is again, on self study.

I'd say online doesn't work for all programs or courses. But do you need to sit in a room with 1k people in order to learn calc 1? It's just the prof going through some examples on the powerpoint/overhead nothing more. Asking questions isn't easy either.

Upload some lecture videos and then hold office hours instead of lecture hours. It's not like what you taught in psyc 100 last semester is much different than this.

[john4532452]

> "You just don't get this with online or remote learning."

I have learned literally more than 99% of my knowledgefrom strangers on the internet and ad hoc conversations on irc and reddit.

[checker659]

> The impact that ad hoc conversations and events with peers and professors have is profound

Not everyone indulges in "ad hoc conversations and events with professors". Some maybe, but most people just get by with minimal work.

[jki275]

All depends on the course of study and the people you're in it with and your own motivations.

I've done both for a very long time. There used to be value in going to the computer lab and spending hours and hours working through problems with peers and seniors.

But that doesn't happen anymore. I've learned just as much in slack chatrooms with fellow students at Georgia Tech, if not more.

If you want to learn, you'll learn. If you don't, you won't -- no matter what the environment is.

[socketnaut]

Depends on your field. If you're studying mathematics or computer science, learning happens mostly through deep work in isolation and there's enough material out there (books, papers, etc.) to support more than a lifetime of problem-solving.

Events and conversations might offer superficial exposure to new ideas or areas of interest but actual understanding requires extended, focused thought that nobody else can do for you.

[tluyben2]

But we are talking about a bachelor here; for a master or phd I see that point... For a bachelor... not so much. Besides parties with my peers and catching up with sleep in lectures during the bachelor, it got interesting after the bachelor exactly because of what you mention.

[verdverm]

The main reason I feel this way is more about environment and wide learning and cross pollination.

I self studied for a long time, topical, learned online mostly. You can do this, and can be very successful.

The point of academic environments is much like that of an office over remote work. One of the pros is the cross pollination of ideas across expertise barriers. This is where innovation happens, faster and more frequently.

[ilaksh]

Why would you not be able to have ad hoc conversations or events in an online environment?

For example video chats or text chats or audio chats or VR chats.

Honestly when people make statements like the one you made, it makes me suspect they actually don't understand the internet.

[rabuse]

Any sources to back up this claim?

[mlthoughts2018]

I speculate this is because specialized higher education is less valuable, in all senses, than well-rounded general education at the bachelor’s level.

A bachelor’s degree is valuable to the student and to society as a transformative period of time when someone can study a wide range of topics, especially topics that focus on large-scale world ethics, and integrate the moral and social maturity imparted by it via social networking within and across universities.

The particular domain knowledge or training in eg math or computer science, pre-med, sociology or psychology, music, education, etc., are not very valuable. Employers don’t really care about any of that, apart from virtue signaling to weed out mass candidate pipelines. The actual knowledge itself is just table stakes and pretty worthless; companies will have to train you to do jobs that have effectively zero to do with acquired skills like programming. But general well-rounded cultural appreciation of a base foundation puts everyone into a level playing field to be fit for plugging in as an employee: basic understanding of how to work in groups on projects, managing interpersonal relationships even when you don’t like them, having a common standard of collegiality and “how things are done,” common understanding of academic/liberal social norms.

While possible, there has not been created an online bachelor’s program that successfully replicates anything like this yet. They all focus on skill building and curriculum, as if that was any part of the purpose of college.

Master’s degrees are quite different. They are a pure credential kind of thing, a certificate of advanced training. It’s assumed you already have the social norm education and that’s not the goal. The hard skills of the training still don’t actually matter to anyone in master’s degrees (nor even PhDs), but they can be used for clout or authority or stack ranking in terms of how decision-making ranks are established. This is much more amenable to online courses because all that matters is the certificate at the end, nobody cares how you got it. With bachelor’s degrees they actually do care that you physically attended “intellectual workforce finishing school” at a physical campus, because the social norm / behavioral training is the only part anyone cares about.

[atlasunshrugged]

That's a great question that I've wondered myself - a part of it (in the U.S.) I think is the belief that a huge part of the value of a bachelors degree is growth you get living alone, in dorms, learning how to be an adult, etc. that aren't really part of a curriculum and would be hard or impossible to do online. In addition, I know that a massive number of people who take online courses (just the individual ones from Coursera and the like) tend to drop out, so maybe they colleges think that if they had an entire 4yr degree online almost no one would actually graduate (which may hurt their rankings or they dislike for some other reason that doesn't bother for profit colleges).

[leetcrew]

> I think is the belief that a huge part of the value of a bachelors degree is growth you get living alone, in dorms, learning how to be an adult, etc. that aren't really part of a curriculum and would be hard or impossible to do online.

a counterexample would be the existence of respected schools with a large amount of commuter students, many of whom continue to live with their parents while going to school. I graduated from such a place. if you really wanted (in cs at least), you could only show up in class for exams and still get an A if you did all the homeworks and projects. this school is one of the most heavily targeted in the state for tech recruiting.

> In addition, I know that a massive number of people who take online courses (just the individual ones from Coursera and the like) tend to drop out, so maybe they colleges think that if they had an entire 4yr degree online almost no one would actually graduate (which may hurt their rankings or they dislike for some other reason that doesn't bother for profit colleges).

this is a bit more convincing. online schools already have a stigma since the originals were almost (or actually) scams. probably no one want to take the risk of offering the first online degree.

[indigochill]

> know that a massive number of people who take online courses (just the individual ones from Coursera and the like) tend to drop out

This is one of those statistics that (I think) misses the context. In college, you complete courses for credit which generally requires sitting through the whole thing.

On Coursera and the like, you typically take the course because there's something in there you want to learn. A particular learner may only be interested in a piece of the overall course and so ignore the parts they're not interested in while focusing on those they are. The engagement paradigm is different on every level from traditional courses, so I don't think it's meaningful to talk about "drop out" rates in that context.

Where it may be more meaningful is to look at drop out rates of students who have paid to take the course for a certificate. In that case, they have signaled intent to complete the course, so talking about a drop out rate becomes meaningful.

[evolve2k]

My partner works for an Australian university, she had this to say when I shared this article with her:

"From my understanding Bachelor degrees are much more regulated (in Australia anyway). Private Colleges can offer Grad Cert and Grad Dip and Master degrees but not Bachelor degrees, which make me think the government has highly regulated Bachelor degrees. I think that there must be a certain percentage of face to face, practical subjects, mentoring and industry placements, but I imagine in the current environment that this will be all up for discussion."

[tinkrr]

This course is offered by a reputable university and is supposed to be equivalent to it's on campus course.

https://www.coursera.org/degrees/bachelor-of-science-compute...

[gwillz]

Recently, I've had the strange privilege to teach for two very different education groups at the same time. One, a traditional university that includes online interaction but definitely not adept at it. The other offers intensive bootcamps that offered online or in-person.

I began this year teaching both as in-person classes. When restrictions from COVID-19 the bootcamp quickly responded and converted all of it's classes online with relative ease. It already offers these classes online with great success and the content has converted into the virtual world _very_ well. Students are completing their work just fine.

The university on the other hand was somewhat slow to respond. The faculty I work for reacted much faster and jumped into virtual classes asap. Even then, the content just isn't designed for online classes. I don't have the tools to properly communicate or provide help. The students don't have the etiquette for it or the motivation.

The cohorts are quite different too - mature students vs. high school graduates - so I guess the compared experiences are muddled by that also.

Overall, I've found the university just hasn't invested in its content. Not to say the program content isn't valuable - I completed it myself years ago. The educators there don't have the drive/need/want to create content that works virtually. They're comfortable where they are, and to be fair, I honestly think in-person teaching can be more effective. However, you can get damn close - virtually - if you can write good content.

I think this echoes other comments here. It's hard and they don't have the resources to get everyone on-board with making online-capable content.

[gumby]

Apparently Coursera manages online degrees that are "real" degrees for some schools. Like U of Illinois: if you get your degree online you get a regular diploma, not one marked that you pursued your studies online (and you qualify for the alumni assoc etc).

The implication I read from this is that online degrees are not taken as seriously. And the fact is there's a lot you get from school beyond the lectures; the interactions with other students and with faculty and just being out of your usual zone all make a big difference.

It's also a lot of work I imagine to get on a platform like Coursera's, and while it's the only one I've really found useful (I've tried a few for a class here or there) I still didn't like it much.

Note: my gf used to work there which is why I tried one course on their platform and why I even know about this at all. Which is another sign that online degrees are still considered marginal.

[munin]

Teaching classes effectively is very hard and very few people can do it. It also doesn’t pay that well and is draining and often times not that rewarding. Universities try to get people that are good at it as professors by bribing them with the respect and autonomy that the title “professor” confers. Outside of the classroom, the professor does whatever they want to advance their own agenda.

I would think online only programs would have a hard time competing with universities for people that can design and execute effective courses. There are so few that most universities don’t even employ many of them. Why would someone like that work for an online school when they could work for one that would give them tenure, funding, lab space, grad students, etc?

[foldr]

>Universities try to get people that are good at it as professors by bribing them with the respect and autonomy that the title “professor” confers.

Generally speaking, universities don't care much about teaching ability. Hiring decisions are based almost entirely on research profiles (except where the institution itself has a clear focus on teaching over research, as at e.g. some liberal arts colleges). There are two main reasons for this. First, research brings more money and prestige. Second, student satisfaction has little to do with teaching quality. You can make students happy just by giving them a light workload and good grades.

So in fact, there are lots of people who are good at teaching who universities have no interest in hiring.

[galimaufry]

> Why would someone like that work for an online school when they could work for one that would give them tenure, funding, lab space, grad students, etc?

Well, someone like that would love to not have to waste time lecturing. By not being on campus they could go to more conferences and spend more time in the field. They could recruit ideal grad students from anywhere on earth without worrying about immigration restrictions or family ties.

[rmbeard]

Online Universities at least some of them do offer those things, within the limits of their funding. And that is really the issue - funding.

[unreal37]

That's quite a cynical take.

[ilaksh]

I think universities are protecting their turf, and people who spent quite a lot of money and effort for in-person college are also to some degree. There are a significant number of people who do not want online bachelor degrees to become credible.

[michaelbrave]

It's because the purpose of college is more about signalling than about career training. The things that keep people out are what make it valuable. If you make it more accessible then it loses it's value.

[vecter]

I see this trope oft-repeated on HN and I just don't think it's true. I certainly hope that that wasn't your college experience. My experience was incredible, both academically and socially, and it truly changed the way I think. The level of abstraction with which I approach the world now is way higher than when I entered college, and I credit that to the math classes I took.This abstract thinking makes me a better problem solver in every part of my life. I also walked away with a handful of friends that will be my best friends until the day I die. College was the crucible that forged those friendships, and I haven't found a substitute for that since.

To you point about "career training", I don't see college as a vocational school. The best point of college in my opinion is to learn not only a lot of facts and specialize in an area of study, but more importantly, to learn how to think and solve problems.

If you learn a lot of facts and rely solely on the facts that you've learned, then obviously you won't adapt well to the real world where most of the problems you encounter are situations with imperfect information and no clear best solutions. However, if you choose your college degree wisely and learn how to learn, then you'll be able to tackle most challenges that come your way later on in life, both in your job and outside.

[barry-cotter]

This conflates the signaling value of certification and training, or to put it another way, selection effect and treatment effect. A qualification can be valuable for what it says about those who got in (Harvard, Yale, every other élite institution with low to non-existent drop out/failure rates) or it can be valuable for what it tells you about those who attained the qualification. Getting an A.S. in Computer Science from a California Community College tells you a lot about the recipient but knowing someone was admitted to a CC tells you nothing. Some qualifications are Harvard, some are that you passed a hard exam. One is much cheaper in time and money than the other.

[JamesBarney]

This could be said of masters degrees as well though.

[symplee]

What we need is a credible credentialing system where you can demonstrate you've acquired knowledge comparable to a bachelors degree. Instead of just adding more walled gardens of degree granting institutions.

[epicureanideal]

Where can I sign up to help build this?

[Buttons840]

How would that be different than a "learn at your own pace" school?

[fapi1974]

This is an interesting question and one I hadn't thought of before. In the market for talent, degrees are just a signaling device. They help employers identify "the good ones." So schools build their signal by making it hard to get in, doing the prework of identifying the good ones. MOOCs, on the other hand, do the opposite - they let anyone in, so there is no signaling. It does seem like you should be able to create an online degree that mirrors this signal by marketing the hell out of how hard it is to get in and complete.

[malandrew]

I would say that it is because a bachelor program is a system that needs to be born at scale to be useful. With most online education, it's a single course. With a bachelors program, it's many curriculums, which is many courses in many areas of study. I don't see how you get to that and preserve quality. The only thing you may not have to scale is having all four years worth of courses on day one. You do however need all courses for the first year of study on day one and a commitment to provide subsequent years of study as students advance. But then it's chicken and egg. What student will pay for a bachelors program that has no guanrantees of the remaining 3 years of the degree.

The only way I see a credible one existing is if people focus on just coursework for one area of study, each of these being a startup, and then later on down the line, consolidation through mergers and acquisitions starts to produce a multidisciplinary program.

The only other path I see is a credible meatspace bachelor program moving entirely online.

I suspect the idea of a bachelors program will die before any of this happens. The increasing focus on indoctrination in higher education is destroying the credibility of the humanities departments. I'd personally be more interested in hiring someone that spent two years doing a focused engineering degree than someone that spent 4 years pursuing a bachelor degree that contains 2 years of engineering and 2 years of indoctrination and brainwashing.